Also google Vanadium Redox flow Battery.
This stuff is happening pretty fast.
Good, because the obvious problem with solar/wind is storage.
I don't know how it will all work out, but it will.
If we don't listen to the nattering nabobs of negativism.
> Also google Vanadium Redox flow Battery.
> This stuff is happening pretty fast.
> Good, because the obvious problem with solar/wind is storage.
> I don't know how it will all work out, but it will.
> If we don't listen to the nattering nabobs of negativism.
> > Also google Vanadium Redox flow Battery.
> > This stuff is happening pretty fast.
> > Good, because the obvious problem with solar/wind is storage.
> > I don't know how it will all work out, but it will.
> > If we don't listen to the nattering nabobs of negativism.
He's a captivating and convincing speaker, and his battery is a pretty cool idea. However, he glosses over some serious and real problems and concerns.
Antimony is toxic and in some forms can ignite or explode. Don't even get me started about magnesium. A 40 foot shipping container full of molten antimony and magnesium would be a high value target for someone wanting to wreak some serious havoc.
Also, for example, antimony melts at almost 1200 degrees F. That's going to be one hot sucker... wonder what hundred (thousands?) of those will do for global warming?
Another problem not addressed is the battery stores and sources DC, but the power grid is AC. So now we'll have to convert that with big power stations that take DC and convert it to AC. DC motors turning AC generators?
He knows all this stuff, but in his talk to that audience, it doesn't make sense to go into those things. That's why it's important to listen with a critical ear sometimes.
I wish him and all the people working on these kinds of problems the best of luck! They are sure gonna need it.
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:10:22 -0700 (PDT), threepont...@live.com wrote:
>Another problem not addressed is the battery stores and sources DC, but the power grid is AC. So now we'll have to convert that with big power stations that take DC and convert it to AC. DC motors turning AC generators?
===
Absolutely not - high efficiency solid state power inverters.
In article <7oimu7pp3l8thcc4rkbod7vjbue4njt...@4ax.com>, waynebatrecdotbo...@hotmail.com says...
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:10:22 -0700 (PDT), threepont...@live.com wrote:
> >Another problem not addressed is the battery stores and sources DC, but the power grid is AC. So now we'll have to convert that with big power stations that take DC and convert it to AC. DC motors turning AC generators?
> ===
> Absolutely not - high efficiency solid state power inverters.
There's many, many forms of alternative energy being worked on. Too many to list.
On Wednesday, June 27, 2012 2:05:53 PM UTC-4, Wayne. B wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:10:22 -0700 (PDT), threepont...@live.com wrote:
> >Another problem not addressed is the battery stores and sources DC, but the power grid is AC. So now we'll have to convert that with big power stations that take DC and convert it to AC. DC motors turning AC generators?
> ===
> Absolutely not - high efficiency solid state power inverters.
Being an electronics guy, I thought about inveters... just wondered if you could scale one up enought to power 200 homes, as he says his ultimate big battery will do. Assuming 200 amps per house, that's 40,000 amps. That's one hell of an inverter. And another big heat source, even with the high efficiency.
>>> Also google Vanadium Redox flow Battery.
>>> This stuff is happening pretty fast.
>>> Good, because the obvious problem with solar/wind is storage.
>>> I don't know how it will all work out, but it will.
>>> If we don't listen to the nattering nabobs of negativism.
>>>> Also google Vanadium Redox flow Battery.
>>>> This stuff is happening pretty fast.
>>>> Good, because the obvious problem with solar/wind is storage.
>>>> I don't know how it will all work out, but it will.
>>>> If we don't listen to the nattering nabobs of negativism.
> >>> Also google Vanadium Redox flow Battery.
> >>> This stuff is happening pretty fast.
> >>> Good, because the obvious problem with solar/wind is storage.
> >>> I don't know how it will all work out, but it will.
> >>> If we don't listen to the nattering nabobs of negativism.
> >>> Also google Vanadium Redox flow Battery.
> >>> This stuff is happening pretty fast.
> >>> Good, because the obvious problem with solar/wind is storage.
> >>> I don't know how it will all work out, but it will.
> >>> If we don't listen to the nattering nabobs of negativism.
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:59:03 -0700 (PDT), threepont...@live.com wrote:
>On Wednesday, June 27, 2012 2:05:53 PM UTC-4, Wayne. B wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:10:22 -0700 (PDT), threepont...@live.com wrote:
>> >Another problem not addressed is the battery stores and sources DC, but the power grid is AC. So now we'll have to convert that with big power stations that take DC and convert it to AC. DC motors turning AC generators?
>> ===
>> Absolutely not - high efficiency solid state power inverters.
>Being an electronics guy, I thought about inveters... just wondered if you could scale one up enought to power 200 homes, as he says his ultimate big battery will do. Assuming 200 amps per house, that's 40,000 amps. That's one hell of an inverter. And another big heat source, even with the high efficiency.
=====
There are solid state switching devices that will handle huge amounts
of power with efficiencies in the 90 to 95% range. That's a lot more
efficient than a typical motor-generator set. Of course heat is
related to the amount of conversion loss so higher efficiency means
less heat. I worked in a reserch lab at Cornell University back in
the late 1960s where we had a multi-million watt solid state inverter
for powering the magnet ring of a particle accelerator. The
electronics were not that exotic even then.
>>>>> Also google Vanadium Redox flow Battery.
>>>>> This stuff is happening pretty fast.
>>>>> Good, because the obvious problem with solar/wind is storage.
>>>>> I don't know how it will all work out, but it will.
>>>>> If we don't listen to the nattering nabobs of negativism.
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:59:03 -0700 (PDT), threepont...@live.com wrote:
>On Wednesday, June 27, 2012 2:05:53 PM UTC-4, Wayne. B wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:10:22 -0700 (PDT), threepont...@live.com wrote:
>> >Another problem not addressed is the battery stores and sources DC, but >> >the power grid is AC. So now we'll have to convert that with big power >> >stations that take DC and convert it to AC. DC motors turning AC >> >generators?
>> ===
>> Absolutely not - high efficiency solid state power inverters.
>Being an electronics guy, I thought about inveters... just wondered if you >could scale one up enought to power 200 homes, as he says his ultimate big >battery will do. Assuming 200 amps per house, that's 40,000 amps. That's >one hell of an inverter. And another big heat source, even with the high >efficiency.
=====
There are solid state switching devices that will handle huge amounts
of power with efficiencies in the 90 to 95% range. That's a lot more
efficient than a typical motor-generator set. Of course heat is
related to the amount of conversion loss so higher efficiency means
less heat. I worked in a reserch lab at Cornell University back in
the late 1960s where we had a multi-million watt solid state inverter
for powering the magnet ring of a particle accelerator. The
electronics were not that exotic even then.
<bmc...@nospamix.netcom.com> wrote:
>The power grid has to stay AC. Was the big battle between Edison and Tesla. >The DC was short distance, and the losses were large.
===
Yes, for the most part. There has been some interesting work done
however using very high voltage DC for long distance transmission.
HVDC has been made possible by the development of high powered
semiconductors and has the advantage of fewer losses in some
environments. It also allows power to be transmitted between grids
that are out of phase with each other.
On Wednesday, June 27, 2012 6:11:03 PM UTC-4, Wayne. B wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:59:03 -0700 (PDT), threepont...@live.com wrote:
> >On Wednesday, June 27, 2012 2:05:53 PM UTC-4, Wayne. B wrote:
> >> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:10:22 -0700 (PDT), threepont...@live.com wrote:
> >> >Another problem not addressed is the battery stores and sources DC, but the power grid is AC. So now we'll have to convert that with big power stations that take DC and convert it to AC. DC motors turning AC generators?
> >> ===
> >> Absolutely not - high efficiency solid state power inverters.
> >Being an electronics guy, I thought about inveters... just wondered if you could scale one up enought to power 200 homes, as he says his ultimate big battery will do. Assuming 200 amps per house, that's 40,000 amps. That's one hell of an inverter. And another big heat source, even with the high efficiency.
> =====
> There are solid state switching devices that will handle huge amounts
> of power with efficiencies in the 90 to 95% range. That's a lot more
> efficient than a typical motor-generator set. Of course heat is
> related to the amount of conversion loss so higher efficiency means
> less heat. I worked in a reserch lab at Cornell University back in
> the late 1960s where we had a multi-million watt solid state inverter
> for powering the magnet ring of a particle accelerator. The
> electronics were not that exotic even then.
I don't doubt it, but that was intermittant duty, and not really mission critical. We're talking about 10 million watts (give or take) and 24/7/365.
5-10% of that is a LOT of heat to dissipate. That particle accelerator could go down for a week and it was not that big of a deal.
This is all cool stuff. We'll get there, where "there" is, one day.
On 6/27/2012 11:59 AM, threepont...@live.com wrote:
> Being an electronics guy, I thought about inveters... just wondered if you could scale one up enought to power 200 homes, as he says his ultimate big battery will do. Assuming 200 amps per house, that's 40,000 amps. That's one hell of an inverter. And another big heat source, even with the high efficiency.
Why do it all in one place? The inverters could be distributed and tailored to smaller loads.
He's a captivating and convincing speaker, and his battery is a pretty cool idea. However, he glosses over some serious and real problems and concerns.
Antimony is toxic and in some forms can ignite or explode. Don't even get me started about magnesium. A 40 foot shipping container full of molten antimony and magnesium would be a high value target for someone wanting to wreak some serious havoc.
Also, for example, antimony melts at almost 1200 degrees F. That's going to be one hot sucker... wonder what hundred (thousands?) of those will do for global warming?
Another problem not addressed is the battery stores and sources DC, but the power grid is AC. So now we'll have to convert that with big power stations that take DC and convert it to AC. DC motors turning AC generators?
He knows all this stuff, but in his talk to that audience, it doesn't make sense to go into those things. That's why it's important to listen with a critical ear sometimes.
I wish him and all the people working on these kinds of problems the best of luck! They are sure gonna need it.
Interesting presentation but storage is not the primary challenge. Generation is the challenge.
The only viable alternative to oil and other fossil fuel energy generation is nuclear until some other
major breakthough is discovered.
I got a kick out of his presentation though. It was obviously not to a group of his peers in the scientific
community. Well done, but if that presentation had been given at a technical convention it would
have been met with multiple challenges and hot debates from the audience, not a standing ovation.
On Thursday, June 28, 2012 12:30:42 AM UTC-4, thumper wrote:
> On 6/27/2012 11:59 AM, threepont...@live.com wrote:
> > Being an electronics guy, I thought about inveters... just wondered if you could scale one up enought to power 200 homes, as he says his ultimate big battery will do. Assuming 200 amps per house, that's 40,000 amps. That's one hell of an inverter. And another big heat source, even with the high efficiency.
> Why do it all in one place? The inverters could be distributed and > tailored to smaller loads.
The presentation was talking about hooking this "to the grid", which implies a single connection point. You could distribute the DC then supply smaller loads, but now you'd have a single point of failure for those small loads, and you'd have the addition issue of the DC distribution. If you retain the present connection to the AC grid at each smaller load point (for redundancy), now you have two completely different distribution systems. We're quickly pricing this technology out of the realm of possibility.
In article <IvadnTIelvAi33HSnZ2dnUVZ_oedn...@giganews.com>, no...@jose.com says...
> Interesting presentation but storage is not the primary challenge. > Generation is the challenge.
No. Storage and transmission are the main challenges.
"Nevada has the highest solar energy potential in the nation and is already the number one state in per capita solar energy production. The DOE estimates that 100 square miles of Nevada land could supply all U.S. electricity needs with current (~10%) commercial efficiency rates. With over 250 days of sunshine a year, Nevada is looking forward to a bright solar future."
You can find similar all over the net. But the "100 square miles" is wrong. Should read "100 miles square," which is 10,000 square miles.
That's about .0025 of U.S total square miles.
But solar panel efficiency is already about twice the 10% mentioned, so that already halves the space needed. Things are moving fast in that area.
Practically, the solar farms would be spread in many places over areas with good sunshine.
What's lacking is storage, transmission, and a plan.
Same with wind, which also reduces the footprint of solar.
> The only viable alternative to oil and other fossil fuel energy > generation is nuclear until some other
> major breakthough is discovered.
The only breakthroughs needed are storage, transmission, a plan, and
a way to remove the shackles of the mind.
The last, as always, is the most difficult challenge.
> I got a kick out of his presentation though. It was obviously not to > a group of his peers in the scientific
> community. Well done, but if that presentation had been given at a > technical convention it would
> have been met with multiple challenges and hot debates from the > audience, not a standing ovation.
He is an entrepreneur, and his audience was investors.
Bill Gates has kicked in $15m.
Whether his approach is the best will be found out in the field.
Others are taking different approaches.
I did notice one nation publicized a wind energy plan, and has already put it in motion.
Ethiopia. With Chinese aid.
Apparently the Ethiopians and Chinese are more forward leaning than the run-of-the-mill American skeptic.
Damn, what happened to our can-do spirit on big things?
Seems this country is now full of can't-do political hacks.
If that doesn't change, most of the world will piss on us.
Rightfully so.
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 16:54:03 -0700, "Califbill"
> <bmc...@nospamix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> The power grid has to stay AC. Was the big battle between Edison and Tesla.
>> The DC was short distance, and the losses were large.
> ===
> Yes, for the most part. There has been some interesting work done
> however using very high voltage DC for long distance transmission.
> HVDC has been made possible by the development of high powered
> semiconductors and has the advantage of fewer losses in some
> environments. It also allows power to be transmitted between grids
> that are out of phase with each other.
> In article <IvadnTIelvAi33HSnZ2dnUVZ_oedn...@giganews.com>, > no...@jose.com says...
> > Interesting presentation but storage is not the primary challenge. > > Generation is the challenge.
> No. Storage and transmission are the main challenges.
> "Nevada has the highest solar energy potential in the nation and is > already the number one state in per capita solar energy production. The > DOE estimates that 100 square miles of Nevada land could supply all U.S. > electricity needs with current (~10%) commercial efficiency rates. With > over 250 days of sunshine a year, Nevada is looking forward to a bright > solar future."
> You can find similar all over the net. But the "100 square miles" is > wrong. Should read "100 miles square," which is 10,000 square miles.
> That's about .0025 of U.S total square miles.
> But solar panel efficiency is already about twice the 10% mentioned, so > that already halves the space needed. Things are moving fast in that > area.
> Practically, the solar farms would be spread in many places over areas > with good sunshine.
> What's lacking is storage, transmission, and a plan.
> Same with wind, which also reduces the footprint of solar.
> > The only viable alternative to oil and other fossil fuel energy > > generation is nuclear until some other
> > major breakthough is discovered.
> The only breakthroughs needed are storage, transmission, a plan, and
> a way to remove the shackles of the mind.
> The last, as always, is the most difficult challenge.
> > I got a kick out of his presentation though. It was obviously not to > > a group of his peers in the scientific
> > community. Well done, but if that presentation had been given at a > > technical convention it would
> > have been met with multiple challenges and hot debates from the > > audience, not a standing ovation.
> He is an entrepreneur, and his audience was investors.
> Bill Gates has kicked in $15m.
> Whether his approach is the best will be found out in the field.
> Others are taking different approaches.
> I did notice one nation publicized a wind energy plan, and has already > put it in motion.
> Ethiopia. With Chinese aid.
> Apparently the Ethiopians and Chinese are more forward leaning than the > run-of-the-mill American skeptic.
> Damn, what happened to our can-do spirit on big things?
> Seems this country is now full of can't-do political hacks.
> If that doesn't change, most of the world will piss on us.
> Rightfully so.
It's big oil that has tainted the minds of the head in the sand set.
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 08:36:46 -0500, Boating All Out
<boa...@boating.com> wrote:
>Seems this country is now full of can't-do political hacks.
>If that doesn't change, most of the world will piss on us.
>Rightfully so.
On 6/28/2012 6:00 AM, threepont...@live.com wrote:
> On Thursday, June 28, 2012 12:30:42 AM UTC-4, thumper wrote:
>> Why do it all in one place? The inverters could be distributed and
>> tailored to smaller loads.
> The presentation was talking about hooking this "to the grid", which implies a single connection point. You could distribute the DC then supply smaller loads, but now you'd have a single point of failure for those small loads, and you'd have the addition issue of the DC distribution. If you retain the present connection to the AC grid at each smaller load point (for redundancy), now you have two completely different distribution systems. We're quickly pricing this technology out of the realm of possibility.
